Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 11/26/2001 2:10:15 PM EDT
I have read numerous threads on martial arts, and inevitably come away with the impression that not many people have respect for Taekwon Do. For those of you who have some experience in the art, which version did you study? From what I know, TKD is like Karate. There are number styles and derivatives of TKD. For those of you down on it, how were you affiliated: ITF/USTF, ATA, WTF, etc? In addition to your responses, please do your best to define what these different organizations mean to you. Thanks.
Link Posted: 11/26/2001 2:25:04 PM EDT
I have a 1st Degree under WTF, and then transferred over to USTA. I did not like TKD much. IMO to be effective you needed to study it at length. Many intructors nowadays are combining it with other arts to be fully rounded. This is where you get off shoots. The different styles you talk of. In its purest form TKD is 70% kick, 30% hands, very little close or what is called in-fighting. To me TKD was not a fully rounded art in its purest form. You needed to mix other arts in it in order for it to be practical for street use. If you are set on Korean Arts, I would point you to Moo Duk Kwon, Kuk Sool Won, or Hapkido. A nice mixture of hands, kicks and ground fighting.
Link Posted: 11/26/2001 2:36:29 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/26/2001 2:38:25 PM EDT by Houston]
I have a 1st degree black belt in the Ji Do Kwon style of Tae Kwon Do. Most of TKD these days is taught as a sport - the idea being to win tournaments. My instructor included elements of Hapkido with our TKD training. Hapkido is much more defense/offense oriented. This teaches holds, releases, pressure points and joint breaking techniques, as well as such things as knife defense. Edited for spelling
Link Posted: 11/26/2001 2:41:39 PM EDT
My husband and I studied a system of Tae Kwon Do called Ji Do Kwan, long ago. This system had a patch that looked like a smaller red ball balanced on a larger red ball, the whole thing outlined in a dark scallop. This system's speciality was aerial (flying) kicks, and it had different Forms than I have seen since. It was a very strong hard style, and we broke boards often. I was always surprised at how well the techniques really *did* work. I agree with LordTrader that the whole style seemed based on distance fighting, and offered very little in diversity of movement, and close up entanglement. We added a Chinese soft style later, with a different teacher to fill in some gaps. We decided the best has to be Korean legs with Chinese hands, covering both hard style, and soft style.
Link Posted: 11/26/2001 2:55:20 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/26/2001 2:50:32 PM EDT by lordtrader]
Originally Posted By Hannah_Reitsch: We decided the best has to be Korean legs with Chinese hands, covering both hard style, and soft style.
View Quote
Hannah if you can find the following Chinese styles in your area, try em out. They have the combo you desire. Sil Lum Kung Fu Shaolin Long Fist Choy Li Fut Sil Lum and Choy Li Fut has a lot of similarities. They both deal in the 5 animal fighting concept. Choy Li Fut is more softer in its application though. Very gracefull form and sets. Big emphasis on weapons in black sash levels. I think this is a perfect fit your comments. Kicks, joint locks/throws, ground fighting and internal(Chi building) all rolled into one. Shaolin Long Fist is harder of the 3. Some of the sets and applications can be compared to some Karate style like Shorinji Kenpo. Lots of kicking both high, low and aerial(specially in Sil Lum) in all 3 style.
Link Posted: 11/26/2001 3:20:18 PM EDT
Thanks LordTrader! The Chinese system we studied was Loong Kwuon Pai Chuan Fa, I believe......sorry if that is misspelled. "Five fingered dragon fist system" is what I think it meant. Our teacher told us this was the style of the folks that had started the Boxer Rebellion. It was good, but not quite what I was searching for. It has been quite a long while, but I think I would love to study again, for both conditioning, as well as alternative defense. I will see if we have any teachers out here in the systems you mentioned. Thanks again :)
Link Posted: 11/26/2001 4:24:02 PM EDT
The problem with Tae Kwon Do, regardless of affiliation, is this... 1. It is a plagurized style. When it "was" a martial art it was basically a poor copy of JKA Karate. The "pooms", the original ones, were stolen outright from the Shotokan system. 2. It has undergone so many renovations that currently it is no longer a martial art even, it is now correctly a martial "sport." 3. 99.9% of the organizations involved in the promotion and practice of TKD are financially motivated ONLY. TKD is fine as a form of exercise and social interaction. Just don't try and use it to protect yourself. I know people who say "You can fight with TKD", but the same can be said about football. In fact, football would probably be a more effective means of combat.
Link Posted: 11/26/2001 5:14:03 PM EDT
Originally Posted By SteyrAUG: 3. 99.9% of the organizations involved in the promotion and practice of TKD are financially motivated ONLY.
View Quote
Amen to that!!! That's why it is called Take Ones Dough by those select few that are serious martial artist.
Link Posted: 11/26/2001 7:32:17 PM EDT
I was kind of hoping to get responses from people who have actually taken TKD, as opposed to people who are involved in other styles. 99.99% is a pretty high number. I assume that it is a hyperbole meant to essentially impune the entire organization without having to be accused of doing so. I assume that a few of you who will reply have trained in TKD for at least a few years before coming to educated opinions on the balance between sport and self-defense in the art. The reason that I posed the initial questions the way I did is that, although there are entire organizations of TKD dedicated to sport, there are some that deemphasize competitions. As a point of comparison, I will bet that at some point we will hear from the BJJ crowd. Just because Judo is the "pure sport" version of the Jujitsu arts doesn't mean that everything Jujitsu based is really all about competition. I'll bet money that they will claim that there is some self-defense merit to it. Ironically, all of there exposure internationally comes from the fact that they were successful for a while in a sporting competition with rules.
Link Posted: 11/26/2001 8:22:02 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Doug_in_CO: Just because Judo is the "pure sport" version of the Jujitsu ....
View Quote
Just to clarify, back then "pure sport" refered to the fact that both oponents could live. Judo was created so that one could practice JuJutsu without killing your opponet. Later on it became even more "sporterized" with the advent of it's introduction into the olympic games, much the way TaeKwonDo has. Many popular arts have "sports applications." San Sho for instance was actually a challange to all commers and was usually a fight to the death. Muay Thai was origionally used by Siam warriors to keep their edge during peace time, and also used to settle disputes. It wasn't until the 1900's that rules were inacted, and not until the 1920's or 1930's or so that it became a ring sport. Modern Kickboxing was spawned from 1960's US karate full contact karate touneys.
Link Posted: 11/26/2001 8:23:46 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/26/2001 8:16:22 PM EDT by SteyrAUG]
Originally Posted By Doug_in_CO: I was kind of hoping to get responses from people who have actually taken TKD, as opposed to people who are involved in other styles. 99.99% is a pretty high number. I assume that it is a hyperbole meant to essentially impune the entire organization without having to be accused of doing so.
View Quote
I would call the 99.9% figure acurate. I do know of some serious Korean martial artists, but they are independents who have no afiliation. They represent the 00.1 % of the figure.
I assume that a few of you who will reply have trained in TKD for at least a few years before coming to educated opinions on the balance between sport and self-defense in the art.
View Quote
I have studied over 30 forms of martial arts in the last 25 years. I am a director of a private non commercial martial arts fraternity. I have studied and researched Korean forms as well as Chinese, Okinawan and Japanese arts.
The reason that I posed the initial questions the way I did is that, although there are entire organizations of TKD dedicated to sport, there are some that deemphasize competitions.
View Quote
True, and these are those that were kept out of the Olympic style loop. As a result they are not even martial "sports" let alone "arts."
As a point of comparison, I will bet that at some point we will hear from the BJJ crowd. Just because Judo is the "pure sport" version of the Jujitsu arts doesn't mean that everything Jujitsu based is really all about competition. I'll bet money that they will claim that there is some self-defense merit to it. Ironically, all of there exposure internationally comes from the fact that they were successful for a while in a sporting competition with rules.
View Quote
Judo is NOT a pure sport but a Budo. Only the AAU version is pure sport. Jui Jutsu is the combative predecessor. And again, "sports" can benefit personal combat. Football players can probably hurt you. But it is not related directly to combat and there are more practical means. And popularity has no bearing on combat efficiency.
Link Posted: 11/26/2001 8:37:23 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Vinnie: Just to clarify, back then "pure sport" refered to the fact that both oponents could live. Judo was created so that one could practice JuJutsu without killing your opponet. Later on it became even more "sporterized" with the advent of it's introduction into the olympic games, much the way TaeKwonDo has.
View Quote
Much of what you said is true. But to clarify a point. Jigaro Kano created Judo from Jui Jutsu not to make it safer but as a result of the Meiji restoration. With the disbanning of the Samurai class and the relative peace to the Tokugawa Shogunate combative arts served no direct purpose. It was Kano who created the first "Do" changing the focus to personal development. The classical "Jutsu" styles became a means to develop character and maintain the Japanese martial heritage. KenJutsu became Kendo, IaiJutsu became Iaido, KyuJutsu became Kyudo, etc. The Japanese character "Do" (also pronounced Michi), means "way, road or path" suggesting a "way of life." The ideogram "Jutsu" means "method or technique" suggesting a pure discipline. If you combine with the character "Ken" meaning "Sword or Blade" you get "KenJutsu" (The technique of the sword, a pure combative method of study), if combined as "Kendo" you get (The way of the sword, meaning a vehicle for improvement via the discipline of fencing). The later "sport only" variation is neither Kenjutsu or Kendo but a focus on a singular aspect known as "Sport Kendo." Replacing "Ken" with "Kyu" (The Bow) and you end up with the variation concerning the original military applications and later way of life concerning Japanese archery. Most modern martial arts are a "Do" form and have a "Jutsu" predecesor. Many have become only "sport" versions of the original "Do."
Top Top